Demoting Islam's Religion Status

[The Reaper]

Originally Posted by Scimitar

I might be wrong here, but wasn't there a similar concern with JFK as technically as a Catholic he had to answer to the law of the church over the law of the land?

Scimitar

Do you think JFK was a good Catholic who followed the Ten Commandments and the teachings of the Church?

TR

[Scimitar]

Good point and sorry that was a bit of a unintentional hijack, back in my lane.

S

[akv]

99.9% of all Muslims have a deeply-held secret agenda (wish) that Islam will conquer their host country and turn it into an Islamic nation. Such is their indelible religious conditioning. This obvious fact has been completely neglected, ignored, avoided and shunned by the leadership of western democracies to their great detriment, including America.

Respectfully, with comments like the above how can anyone take Sobiesky seriously? Islam is definitely a challenge we have to face. Barring the psychic ability to know what millions of people are thinking, it seems discussions here fall into two camps on the topic.

1) Islam is static and thus different from any other religion, impervious to any evolution, it has always been this way it will always be this way.

2) Islam is dangerous and must be dealt with, but like any religion it is composed of people. People can diminish or force the evolution of any political or religious entity, especially with the emergence of strong leaders.

If I were in camp one I would be very worried, since this argument taken to fruition equates Islam and thus “99.9% of all Muslims” according to Mr. Sobiesky as an eternally static non sentient hostile mass, very similar to a malignant tumor. There is no negotiating with or influencing a tumor, it must be destroyed either surgically or irradiated. So basically if Islam is such we are not safe until we kill every Islamic man, woman, and child. Moral questions aside, I believe we have the weapons to do so, Genghis Khan, Stalin, or the Nazis may have had the will to do this, America will never do this. So if this camp is correct we are in a lot of trouble because if you haven’t the will to use a weapon, you don’t have the weapon. If you are in camp one what is the solution if you aren’t willing to simply “exterminate the brutes”?

People have brought up the point Christianity was quite capable of barbarism over time, citing the Inquisition, heretics, burning people at the stake, with trials and the suppression of art, etc. The counter argument here is yes but Christianity went through this stuff ages ago, Islam hasn’t evolved. Nazi Germany and Fascist Italy were Christian nations who plunged the world into a war that killed millions only 70 years ago. Take the Holocaust for example, six million plus Jews lost their lives. Were their murderers Nazi’s or Christians, the answer is both. At the same time the King of Denmark also a Christian ordered all Danes to wear yellow stars under occupation to protect their Jews. So is this an inconsistency in Christianity or is it simply the age old separation between good and evil in men? What is the logic in saying Sadaam Hussein was just another evil Muslim leader (he was never particularly religious), but Hitler was just an evil despot, conveniently ignoring his faith.

Perhaps it’s that human beings are herd animals who need to be led, and the West has on the whole been blessed with better leaders of late, men like our founding fathers, Churchill or Reagan. You only have to watch an old Nazi movies reel or endure an Obama rally to see the power of a charismatic leader. ( No I’m not equating the two). I also saw the argument made the Crusades were defensive in nature. If British and French Knights are fighting Saracens in Normandy I buy this, how is it defensive if Jerusalem is the battlefield? Was this truly a Holy War or war for land, resources, and power as usual. Islam needs to be confronted on several planes, it has glaring vulnerabilities, there seems to be little in it for women, and its fundamentalist nature focused on the past ignores quality of life advances.

Americans in 1944 were saying the Japanese were feudal radical zealots who wouldn’t surrender, used suicide attacks, and lived by an ancient and rigid code. Look at the Japanese now; they are a modern liberal democracy and economic power that has outlawed war in their constitution. People will change if it’s to their benefit, especially if led.

[longrange1947]

Originally Posted by akv

.................... Americans in 1944 were saying the Japanese were feudal radical zealots who wouldn’t surrender, used suicide attacks, and lived by an ancient and rigid code. Look at the Japanese now; they are a modern liberal democracy and economic power that has outlawed war in their constitution. People will change if it’s to their benefit, especially if led.

Not a good comparison, do you believe that would be the case today if they had not been "brutally" conquered?

[afchic]

Originally Posted by Roguish Lawyer

Having recently done some additional reading on the topic, I am convinced that anyone who strictly follows the Koran is probably a threat. The question is whether there are groups of muslims who don't follow the literal requirements of the religion.

There are many examples of religious commandments that are not followed by adherents to a religion. Most Jews, for example, do not keep kosher or follow various other laws set forth in the Torah. There is some pretty over-the-top stuff in the Torah IIRC (it's been quite a while), but most Jews just ignore that stuff and focus on other things. Contrary as it may be to what the religious writings say, many people take a "modern" or reformed view of their religion and pick which parts of it they want to practice, ignoring the rest.

I am curious if anyone has any views on the foregoing. AF Chic?

Good points. That is one of my problems with many of the fundamentalist Christian Churches, or heck any church for that matter. They pick and choose the texts from the Bible they are going to follow, and ignore the ones that don't conform to their way of thinking. For instance, and I am paraphrasing obviously, In the same verse of Timothy that homosexuality is discussed as being a sin, it also discusses the wearing of mixed fabrics as a sin. It also discusses how women cutting their hair is a sin, etc etc. Many only focus on the homosexuality piece, and ignore the rest.

For those that follow their church's teaching to the letter of the law, on one hand I say good on you, you have faith and I applaud that. On the other hand I find it to be unrealistic, and for those that stumble, I have to wonder what kind of guilt comes from that, and how does that effect the individual, their family, their community. None of us are perfect, and God expects us to stumble, but I have been raised with a kind and compassionate God, not a spiteful, wrathful one. There is a difference, I believe, in guilt factor that comes with that, and how you go about redeeming yourself.

I have taken a lot of classes on other religions, and I have found there is much to admire about many of them. There are many teachings out there, that regardless of the fact that I am Catholic, doesn't mean I can't take a Hindu teaching, or a Buddhist teaching, or a Jewish teaching into my life. Does that make me a bad Catholic? Many would say yes. But does it make me a better person, some would say maybe so. Which is more important.

I think the main problem with any religion, is the belief that they are right and everyone else is wrong. The belief that only a certain group are going to make it to heaven. The belief that if one strays they are going to hell.

I think the questions we should all be asking ourselves is: "Can't we all just get along?"

[akv]

Not a good comparison, do you believe that would be the case today if they had not been "brutally" conquered? -Longrange1947

You are absolutely correct we made them submit. Islam has the same vulnerability, why reinvent the wheel?. We went in to Japan removed the toxic leadership, installed new leadership and pumped them full of US culture, The Japanese adult generation of the time probably just grudgingly submitted, too late for them, but the kids and grandkids bought fully in to liberal democracy, Mcdonalds, MTV and blue jeans.

Let the Liberals whine about exporting our culture, the tactic is sound and proven, the Roman Empire did the same thing. I don't want to see US troops die for nothing which is why Iraq is key, if a decade from now Iraq is a stable democracy the Islamic world will change. Personally I think it will come from women, half the population, in my opinion the "have nots" of Islam, if they they see a chance for the freedoms and equality of a modern state, they will embrace it and foster these idea in the youth and future. Radical Islam as any fundamentalist religion longs for the past, it is outmoded and knows it, which is why I believe it is so savage. I don't agree with everything we did in Iraq, but I think we were just starting to stabilize the country and let our culture seep in when we have decided to leave. I suppose I'm in the minority who feels we should stay a decade if need be. If Iraq is a stable democracy in the future, history may be kinder to President Bush than the present.

[Team Sergeant]

Originally Posted by afchic

Sir,

I have to wonder if people had the same view of the Catholic Church in the past? It can't be denied that the Church was as involved in Politics as Islam is. Heck the Pope used to rule over half the world. Just curious as to your thoughts, and idea on comparison.

About the same time, we also thought the world was flat. Some of us move on. You continue to mix apples and oranges that are centuries apart. Not a good argument in my opinion.

There are many events in human history that were stupid, most have left them behind, islam does not.

[Richard]

ONE THING is certain, Islam is not a religion by anything Americans believe one to be — not even close. In fact, Islam is the antithesis of what we deem to be religious. Above all, Islam is a totalitarian political machine of bloodthirsty conquest which zealously advocates the downfall of the U.S. government.

I always wondered how we would ever replace Communism - seems as if it was an easier task than I thought it to be.

And so it goes...

Richard's $.02

[HOLLiS]

Originally Posted by afchic

Good points. That is one of my problems with many of the fundamentalist Christian Churches, or heck any church for that matter. They pick and choose the texts from the Bible they are going to follow, and ignore the ones that don't conform to their way of thinking. For instance, and I am paraphrasing obviously, In the same verse of Timothy that homosexuality is discussed as being a sin, it also discusses the wearing of mixed fabrics as a sin. It also discusses how women cutting their hair is a sin, etc etc. Many only focus on the homosexuality piece, and ignore the rest.

For those that follow their church's teaching to the letter of the law, on one hand I say good on you, you have faith and I applaud that. On the other hand I find it to be unrealistic, and for those that stumble, I have to wonder what kind of guilt comes from that, and how does that effect the individual, their family, their community. None of us are perfect, and God expects us to stumble, but I have been raised with a kind and compassionate God, not a spiteful, wrathful one. There is a difference, I believe, in guilt factor that comes with that, and how you go about redeeming yourself.

I have taken a lot of classes on other religions, and I have found there is much to admire about many of them. There are many teachings out there, that regardless of the fact that I am Catholic, doesn't mean I can't take a Hindu teaching, or a Buddhist teaching, or a Jewish teaching into my life. Does that make me a bad Catholic? Many would say yes. But does it make me a better person, some would say maybe so. Which is more important.

I think the main problem with any religion, is the belief that they are right and everyone else is wrong. The belief that only a certain group are going to make it to heaven. The belief that if one strays they are going to hell.

I think the questions we should all be asking ourselves is: "Can't we all just get along?"

I kind of wish you would stick to Islam. Some of your general comments about other religions are incorrect. Not all religions does hell. Not all religions are linear in their thinking (The Greek way), etc. What was done or the mistakes long ago maybe worth exploring but in a different discussion. This is now, Islam is the 'religion' that is being used by tangos to justify their barbarism.

Is it the religion or the misuse of religion that leads to terrorism? If it is the religion, then what actions should we take, or if it is specific sect of Islam or specific Mosque/Clerics.

From my limited understanding of US Law, it would be very difficult to impossible to remove the religious status of Islam. From what I remember from cults, the cults are not abolished the individual members are held responsible for any crimes. I think that would the method employed against the tangos.

[The Reaper]

I think that a cogent point we seem to be missing here is that we are a nation of (primarily) Christians. We are NOT a Christian nation. Our founding fathers saw to that. A representational democratic government of elected civilians, operating under a constitution guaranteeing our freedoms, and under the rule of secular law, passed by an elected Congress and judged by educated jurists, form the basis of our laws. I can build a mosque or a temple in virtually any place I wish in the U.S. Minority religions are tolerated, and are protected by the law. Religious figures hold no official role in government. The Pope, heads of Protestant faiths, imams, mullahs, rabbis, etc. have no role in the rule of this nation. There are many bad Christians. But Christianity itself is not bad.

On the other side of the coin, most Islamic nations are the antithesis of that. There, religion takes precedence over government, law, common sense, etc. There are very few majority Islamic nations where religion is not the dominant factor in governance, law, and societal interaction. They are almost all de facto theocracies. The only exceptions I can think of have been the dictatorships held together by military power and secret police. Religious officials are the real power in Islamic nations, whether they are overtly or covertly doing so. Islamic rulers serve at the whim of the religious leaders. As for progress, where are the modern Islamic scientists? Is A.Q. Khan the best they can do? What benefits to the planet have been made by the Muslims in the last 500 years? What Muslim nation sets the standard of living for the global community? Islam trumps law, constitutions, democracy, and election results itself. If an Islamic religious leader orders a follower to violate civil or criminal law, even to do harm to fellow Muslims, it must be obeyed as Allah's will. Under Islam, women are chattel property and 2nd class citizens, non-Muslims are 3rd class, or less, Jews are sub-human, the law is the one laid down by the founder of the religion 1400 years ago, and bestiality, pedophilia, sodomy, murder, rape, slavery, etc. are supported by religious doctrine. IMHO, Islam, is a seriously flawed religion, one that dogmatically disallows peaceful coexistence with any other faiths, except as an Islamic caliphate. If you believe otherwise, go to one of the majority Muslim "nations" and perform some missionary work. Build a church. Hand out Bibles. Reality check. See what happens.

TR

[Warrior-Mentor]

Originally Posted by Team Sergeant

About the same time, we also thought the world was flat. Some of us move on. You continue to mix apples and oranges that are centuries apart. Not a good argument in my opinion.

There are many events in human history that were stupid, most have left them behind, islam does not.

Even further than mixing Apples and Oranges....

It's mixing SHEEP with WOLVES IN SHEEP'S CLOTHING.

[Plutarch]

Originally Posted by The Reaper

Under Islam, women are chattel property and 2nd class citizens, non-Muslims are 3rd class, or less, Jews are sub-human, the law is the one laid down by the founder of the religion 1400 years ago, and bestiality, pedophilia, sodomy, murder, rape, slavery, etc. are supported by religious doctrine. If you believe otherwise, go to one of the majority Muslim "nations" and perform some missionary work. Build a church. Hand out Bibles. Reality check. See what happens.

TR

Good point, Sir. Anyone who disagrees should check out Voice of the Martyrs. Christians are routinely attacked, imprisoned, and beheaded; churches are burned; and Christian children are abducted for the sex slave trade.

http://www.persecution.com/public/newsroom.aspx

[Razor]

Regarding the transgressions of Catholics in the past (which, as had been noted earlier, were gross departures from the central tenets of the faith, not strict adherence to them), should parents that used illegal drugs, engaged in premarital sex, cheated on exams, drove drunk or committed some other illegal/immoral act stand by and allow their children to do the same?

[Dozer523]

Warrior Mentor:
Afchic does not worship Satan. I've seen her in Mass.
When she approached the door, no gargoyles toppled from the roof. When she dipped her finger in the Holy Water font, it did not boil. At Holy Communion, the Lay Eucharistic Minister did not turn into a pillar of salt.
I hope this clears things up so we can return to a logical discussion of this subject.

[Scimitar]

1) Islam is static and thus different from any other religion, impervious to any evolution, it has always been this way it will always be this way.

2) Islam is dangerous and must be dealt with, but like any religion it is composed of people. People can diminish or force the evolution of any political or religious entity, especially with the emergence of strong leaders.

All well said,

And you have driven home the point of the thread which essentially is
"What IS the 'Islamic' variable exactly?" and "How should we interact with it strategically?"

Let’s lay down some facts here.
1) Europe WILL BE Muslim demographically and politically in 20-40 years, even Europe is starting to wake up and realize that. As a 31 yr old I fully expect the west to become a minority well before I die.
2) Islam as it stands today and sees it self today has at its very core the scriptural authority AND THE MANDATE to wipe you and me off the planet. This is fact people.
3) For the Islamic world to not continue to flow in that direction it needs to pull away from the intense gravity of it's own sacred text, one that very very clearly states that every good Muslims job is to wipe you and me off the planet.

So....in 20-40 years Islam will have the power geographically (Europe) and economically (oil) as well as the scriptural authority nay mandate to destroy or Judeo-Christian ethic, which weather you like it or not IS the basis to “our very way of life” that our boys (and girls) are bravely dying for in the box and elsewhere.

Now, can Islam change the way it sees it's self and interprets its sacred text in a significant enough way so that we can stop having to seeing it as a fundamental threat to our Judeo-Christian world view?

Sure it can. But I think the question that we need to ask is can it make that change quick enough?

Christianity made that change only because a signifcant number of its members where able to sit down and say, "Hey the scripture doesn't say that, it very clearly says this, you (the church leadership) have been misinterpreting it due to blindness brought about by political power. So we have the authority of scripture to change Christianity, and I will stand on that authority and take action" Martin Luther butchered and paraphrased.

On what basis can moderate Islam make a stand? It’s scripture says we should be wiped off the planet, is moderate Islam going to say "Hey I know scripture says to kill them all, but based on the authority of my desire to be a nice guy I am going to stand against you my brother and probably die for me belief"

The Christian reformation of total political control to no political control actually took around 800 years, Islam is about 400 years into that process and the second 400 years is a hell of a lot harder then the first.

Do you really think Islam can squeeze the rest of that change which took Christianity 400 years into 40 years and with the added handicap of basing that change on wanting to be a nice guy where as Christianity based it’s change on the authority of its scripture.

Like I stated earlier, for a Muslim to be good (read plural) they must ignore their scripture, for a Christian to be good they must listen to their scripture. Pluralism actually is “Biblical”. (P.S. Ultra Pluralism isn’t)

We are dealing with a religion (and therefore a people) who’s sacred text fundamentally wants to wipe us of the planet. Like any of the major religions it finds its authority in its sacred text.

It can not change in time, its minority militancy has the authority of its holy scriptures backing them up and they have the will to die for it, its moderacy has no real authority backing it up and certainly doesn't have the will to die for that belief.

In 40 years Islam will be the World Super Power with the cultural and political agenda of converting you or killing you and it can't make that giant leap from thinking about changing (where some of it is right now) to actually fully changing in 40 years.

Good thread…

Scimitar